How do ratings "sweeps" work?

[LupusDei]

There have been many sweeps since the last time there was a vote cast on that story. If that vote was a problem, then why didn't the earlier sweeps catch it? Why sweep it now?

There can be legitimate reasons, even if it's extremely easy to construct such as an error.

The thing is, we talk about algorithm that try to ascertain voter's intent from whatever limited metadata that have been gathered and stored along the recorded vote. It can only be relatively straight forward in the few limited cases where it's blatantly obvious that the vote is generated by primitive automation. Some number of malicious vote would survive, and some number of genuine vote will be removed, just because whatever the metadata is collected, there always will be sets of malicious votes that would have metadata extremely similar to sets of supposedly legitimate votes, and even changing decisions about the breaking point wouldn't, in principle, change the fact, it necessarily will be a compromise.

And such compromise necessarily has to evolve over time, to stay relevant and on top of latest developments, at least in theory, in both malicious abuse and genuine user behaviors. It's warfare. Let's say, a particularly creative but otherwise unquestionable attempt of abuse is detected -- analysis reveals common properties of questionable voting -- a new rule is enacted; some older vote exhibit critical similarities, fall under
the new rule and gets removed, yes, as false positive likely, but who knows. Letting old vote just be might seem wise, but perhaps even how to cut it off isn't at all trivial.

However you cut it, like in any war, civilians are being hurt, often at greater numbers than true combatants. Smarter trolls mean more aggressive sweeps and more supposedly legitimate votes lost in crossfire; that's why talking the art may not be good idea ...even if obscurity is poor security, and all that.

Talking scores irregularities...

As I have mentioned it somewhere here already, but perhaps relevant to repeat here (and no, I have no personal interest, just find it a fascinating case I have noticed), there's a story in E&V category called Saturday Night School (incomplete and inactive on site and supposedly available commercially, so it could even be possible to construct case of it being in breath of the site rules) with used to have absurdly high ratings (imho deserved, although we talk about seemingly impossible 4.98) and cluttered the Hall of Fame with it's parts (with imho should not happen, but that's the system we have). Then one day quite a while ago suddenly its ratings changed to 4.75, on all ten parts of it, exactly the same. Not a bad score, sure, but enough to kick it off HoF of that category. Whoever made that *correction* did make it stick for a long time, although if that's not obvious manipulation, I don't know what would be. Since, it have slowly creeping back higher, and are back in HoF with 4.86 on last and 4.84 on several parts, while interestingly part #3 is still at 4.76 so it's likely more new votes than sweeps doing that change.

 

[JamesMiehoff]

First rule of Lit Club: Don't talk about Sweeps!

James

 

[LargoKitt]

Hidden trolls under the bridge

I'm curious. How does anyone know there are trolls on Literotica? Unless, perhaps, you have been one? And why would you bother? It seems the pleasure of seeing a hot story chill is pretty close to zilch. And why would "sweeps" change ratings? The most disconcerting answer is that Literotica is monitering each readers viewing habits and every connection a viewer makes to the site. For me that's worse than trolls. Of course, people's friends pump UP their popularity in some venues. Hopefully, here, if you ask your friends to read your stuff and love it, they are enjoying your work (and maybe getting you some extra booty calls.) Just sayin'.

 

[KeithD]

When you have a deep portfolio of posted stories for a decade and a half of mostly mid-4-range ratings, you get gang banged on the AH, one of those gang bangers inexplicably favorites you (that's how a reader would get notification you have a new story up), and all nine of your subsequent stories are getting a higher number of votes than usual and they are putting the stories into the low 3 range until/unless a sweep clears them back up the normal range for your portfolio, you can be pretty sure you're being trolled.

 

[XerXesXu]

Many authors have noted that they never give ratings below 4, possibly 3 which calls into question the ‘utility’, ‘fairness’, or other terms of your choice, of ratings of 1 and 2. I just wonder whether the website owners recognise these ratings are just an undesirable anomaly of a very crude rating system, helpful to neither readers nor writers, and cull them at random.

Maybe there is no algorithm and the troll who’s out to get one may simply be a paranoid artefact.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Hopefully, here, if you ask your friends to read your stuff and love it, they are enjoying your work (and maybe getting you some extra booty calls.) Just sayin'.

You've possibly not seen the games people played several years ago, especially during contests (with monetary prizes) to manipulate scores and down-vote other writers, that led to the sweeps in the first place. Once you've experienced that history, and observe what still happens in every contest (although not at the same extreme feral levels), I don't think there's much doubt that trolling behaviour exists.

 

[KeithD]

Yes, the fact that Literotica does sweeps (it didn't do so until a few years back) and that these sweeps significantly change ratings is pretty much proof that there is trolling going on on Literotica (unless it means the sweeping program is really screwed up).

 

[LargoKitt]

Why are there trolls?

Lots of my stories get fairly high ratings. Lately, so many of them are down to 4.48 or 4.49 with only a few votes since they were last tallied.

My stories aren't entered by me in contests; so I don't see why someone would want to "put them out of the running". They almost never get verbally trashed, so it doesn't seem anyon is trying to "punish" them. Maybe they get a lot of enthusiasm when they are new and a more measured evaluation later if someone is exploring my whole catalog?

But who is small minded enuf to go "teeheehee, I bumped that sucker out of the hot column?"

Kicking over sand castles.

LargoKitt